Loading indicator
News & Reviews
Last 7 Days
  • Entry price, ride, equipment, practicality, style, quality
  • Handling at the limit, fuel economy

7 / 10

Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
by Karl Peskett

The pick of the CX-7 bunch

Model Tested:

  • 2010 Mazda CX-7 Classic (FWD); 2.5-litre, four-cylinder, petrol; five-speed automatic; five-door SUV: $33,990*

CarAdvice Rating:

Front-wheel-drive, all-wheel-drive, diesel, petrol, turbocharged, naturally aspirated – the four model Mazda CX-7 range literally has something to suit everybody. Don’t like the diesel clatter? Perhaps the turbo-charged petrol model is for you. Want to save some dollars at the bowser? Then your choice is the diesel. Want to save some money come purchase time? Then this week’s tester, the CX-7 Classic is perhaps the box you should tick.

Visually, the only way to pick it from its more expensive siblings is the smaller wheels, lack of front fog-lamps and the deleted Mazda badge from the tailgate. Really, trainspotters are the only ones who will realise that you’ve just saved yourself $5000 from the next model up the CX-7’s specification ladder. If you walked past the Classic in a carpark, you’d think it was just another CX-7.

Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test

But the real difference is under the skin. The Classic is cheaper by virtue of the fact it has two less driven wheels, and a larger, naturally aspirated petrol engine. Using the engine from the Mazda6 and Mazda3 SP25, the CX-7 Classic makes 2kW less power (120kW) and 22Nm less torque (205Nm), but still retains the familiar Mazda four cylinder sound.

It’s smooth and linear, making most of its grunt near the redline (at 6000rpm), but is quite flexible, too, with peak torque coming in at just 2000rpm – that’s diesel territory. It means it’s happy to amble along at low speed in a quiet and unfussed manner. It’s not the quickest soft-roader around, (0-100km/h in 11.1 seconds) but it responds to throttle inputs immediately and uses its five-speed box to select the best revs for the job, although fuel economy could be improved.

We managed 11.1-litres/100km for city only driving, which is still below Mazda’s urban-only ADR figure of 12.7L/100km; not quite good enough the compete with its diesel sibling (9.3L/100km) but still better than the quicker, turbo-charged petrol model (15.3L/100km). While rolling, the 2.5-litre Classic will overtake reasonably willingly, but this is no drag-race special. Rather, it’s a relaxed, average-paced performer, which relies more on smoothness than shear sprint performance.

Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test

Helping this is the automatic transmission which shifts with fluidity and only is really felt on full throttle applications. In manual mode, you push back to shift up and forward to shift down – the more natural way. Using manual changes, it will also hold gears at the rev limiter, but as this car is not designed for any off-roading, it’s hardly necessary.

Yes, unlike the Classic Sports, Luxury Sports and Diesel Sports which are all-wheel-drive, the CX-7 Classic is front-wheel-drive only. In normal day-to-day driving, most drivers would be hard pressed to notice the difference. Stomping on the throttle while turning a corner reveals a tendency to understeer, as well as the minutest amount of torque steer as it tugs at the steering wheel, but most drivers would never press that hard.

Higher speed cornering also produces some tyre squeal from the smaller 17-inch hoops, but steering feedback and appropriate lean means you know when the car is approaching its limits, so you’ll wisely refrain from pushing it that far. So sure, the smaller wheels don’t help it to handle as well as the more expensive CX-7s, but they also soften up the ride to make the Classic the more plush option of the range.

Another area that feels plush is the interior. With comfortable, body hugging front cloth seats, and equipment like auto-headlights, climate control, six-stack CD/MP3 sound system and reversing camera, the CX-7 Classic certainly offers a competitive amount of kit. The steering wheel has audio controls, settings menu access as well as cruise control, so from the driver’s seat you have complete control.

Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test

The rear seats are a little flatter and firmer than the fronts but you would never call them uncomfortable. There’s excellent headroom and decent legroom in the back, although you do miss out on air-con vents. You can, however point the centre vent on the centre stack toward the back, but on very hot days it takes a while to reach the rear.

Visibility is excellent all around (the standard reversing camera helps here) although if you sit very low in the driver’s seat the thick A-pillar and wing mirror can block a little of your forward right-hand vision. Best to sit a little higher and forward to account for this.

It’s the pricing, though, that really makes the CX-7 Classic an enticing proposition. The Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, Jeep Patriot and Jeep Compass, Mitsubishi Outlander and Nissan X-Trail all are positioned around the same price as the Classic. But none of them have the same edgy and modern styling as the CX-7, with interior quality (excepting the Honda) also nowhere near as good. The CX-7 Classic also has the best ride of the bunch, a five star safety rating and has an unlimited kilometre warranty too.

If you’ve got your heart set on a cheap soft-roader, but are never going to take it off road, the the CX-7 Classic is worthy of serious consideration. It’s smooth, has the quality, space and safety to house the family, and for a CX-7 is priced very keenly. In fact, it’s probably the pick of the bunch.

  Submit an Owner Car Review


Mazda CX-7 Review & Road Test
  • 7
  • 7
  • 7
  • 8
  • 8
  Submit an Owner Car Review

  • Dan T

    I was very disappointed with the new CX-7.

    Engines not too bad. Ergonomics awful.

    I felt disconnected from the car. You sit along way back from the dials, trip computer display and reverse camera. Then there is the foot brake.

    This car is not that practical for young kids either. Our six year old had no hope of seeing out of the rear window – booster or no booster – and this tends to disconnect children from the drive.

    Nice engines, but altogether very disappointed.

    • Gambler88

      do you own the car? if you did i’m not sure why you purchased them if they were as bad as you described them.

      btw the adr figure is 9.4l/100km as stated in the specification. i’ve driven a few number of cars over the years (subaru, audi, nissan, toyota, etc) and not many car can achieve the adr figures for fuel consumption.

      • Dan T

        I didn’t buy it for the reasons above.

  • Baddass

    I’m sorry Karl, but 11.1L/100km for a medium size SUV is quite decent, especially when it’s a naturally aspirated 4-cylinder tugging around nearly 1.6 tons.

    • Shak

      How is that decent. It only weighs 1.6 the same as my Accord and we manage around 9.1-9.5 on average. While, the extra capacity of the Mazda may account for this, it cant be worth two extra liters consumption.

      • Baddass

        Yeah but add in all the other factors like taller and more bluff body (more wind resistance), bigger and semi-offroad tyres, etc, and it all adds up.

        BTW Shak, quite an impressive garage you’ve got going wouldn’t you say? An Accord, a Cruze and an SS V? Of course, you wouldn’t be lying…

        • Shak

          Even all those factors could not mean a 2 litre difference. Taller body with more wind resistance would max mean a litre more if driven like a bogan.
          Accord Aint mine. Cruze and SSV are. Accord is my dads.

          • Baddass

            You can’t compare the two fairly Shak. They have completely different mechanicals, design and intended market. But my point is, that for a 4-cylinder, medium SUV 11.1L/100km is reasonable compared to it’s competitors. I never meant to compare it with an Accord, because it makes no sense to. The buyers of these cars sure wouldn’t.

          • Shak

            Ok. I’ll agree on that point. But in comparison to an Outlander. Same capacity, more power and torque, and its AWD ,and only drinks 9.5 under ADR.

          • Tony

            i wonder why no one will admit that Mazda do not make cutting edge engines?

            where’s the direct injection?

            saying that many japanese brands lag in engine design these days…

          • SteveH

            The 2.3 litre turbo engine is direct injection

  • Lagoza

    Hi Karl, how does it compare to the ix35 Active which is also 2×4 and similar price.

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Karl Peskett

      Hi Lagoza.

      To be honest, I haven’t had a chance to test the ix35, so I couldn’t really compare and give an accurate answer.


      • vid_ghost

        Will Car Advice be reviewing the ix35 Active 2WD Auto?

        Going by how many comments were left on the ix35 review( preview ) it will be worthwhile and have many readers!

        Nice CX7 reivew BTW!

        • http://www.caradvice.com.au Karl Peskett

          vid_ghost, absolutely. Keep your eyes peeled in the coming weeks.

      • Martin

        Karl, How about the new Sorento then?

        • http://www.caradvice.com.au Karl Peskett

          Hi Martin.

          Interesting one, because the Sorento is in a different category. It’s larger and has seven seats. It’s therefore more expensive, so in the scheme of things you can’t compare the two.

          That said, the diesel Sorento has to be one of the best SUVs going around, no matter what your budget.

          • Martin

            Thanks for clearing that up. :) No wonder I never took this seriously, I was always comparing it to a bigger class vehicle.

  • http://www.betweentwopoints.com Andy

    If anyone wanted concrete confirmation that people buy these huge cars with absolutely no inclination of going anywhere that warrants ground clearance, here it is. A FWD SUV.

    Yes, yes, I can see the benefits of reduced kerb weight (increased payload, fuel economy etc), and Mazda have done well to pick the market. I’m also sure they’ve built a nice car to drive…

    But as my special super power has been the “Have A Massive 4WD Parked Next To My Car Whenever I Return To It” ability, this just annoys me. It’s all the vision-blocking goodness of a massive and high car, but without any pretension that the driver will actually utilise any of it.

    … My counsellor says it’s good for me to vent…

    • Hung Low

      Andy, I can think of a very valid reason why people, predominantly women buy these cars……….Practicality, convenience, better visibility. The extra height makes it much easier to strap in babies and small kids into their car seats. The higher, larger flat boot floor is like a wagon and practical in many ways i.e changing babies etc.
      I think you have the motorist form of “little man syndrome” if you feel threatened by vehicles bigger than yours!

      • http://internode.on.net Peter

        Hung Low … the boot is tiny compared to the size of the car. If you wanted boot/interior space you wouldn’t buy a SUV. The “height to load” and “visibility” arer fair comments but I don’t get the practicality aspect at all.

        • Hung Low

          Peter, take a look at an Xtrail, Outlander and tell me if they are small in the rear! Try fitting one let alone 2 big wheel prams into a boot of a Falcadore let alone a euro or mazda 6. These are easily accommodated in the latter two suv’s mentioned!
          Compare to a station wagon, yes your point about tiny boots for the size is valid but the suv’s also fulfil the other visibility and height to load practicalities. Add in the AWD and highish tow ratings i.e 2tonne on an X trail and they become very practical all rounders!

          • http://internode.on.net Peter

            Sorry, Hung Low, as I mentioned I can see your point re: visibility and load height. But 4WD doesn’t come into it – this is a 2 wheel drive.

            Also you mention tow capacity … 1 tonne! My old Golf could tow 1.2 tonnes. If I wanted visibility, high load, space and towing capacity I would get a VW Multivan. If I wanted the safety of all wheel drive I’d get a VW Multivan 4Motion – craps all over all the several SUVs I’ve ever tried – all this with 2.5tonne towing capacity and seating 7 adults in comfort.

            But then, each to his own.

        • ohreally

          so women drivers get better visibility?
          At the expense of others?

          perhaps only people beyond a certain height should drive tall cars, because some struggle to see over the bonnet line

      • http://www.betweentwopoints.com Andy

        I’ll concede the visibility point, but I will reinforce my original comment by asking if this is worth the possible compromise to other drivers’ view of the road?

        As has been noted, people with back related problems can have issues with getting in and out from conventional cars, however my experience in Fleet Management has lead me to believe that this can be solved by changing your technique and proper instruction. People with spinal fusions have managed to adjust fine. Could the baby points you raise be addressed with a change in technique? And no… i don’t have children.

        However, my indignation won’t change anything, as has been pointed out… people want these cars. They’re not going away. Ever. We will have to agree to disagree on the relative merits of these kinds of cars, I think.

        • Hung Low

          Andy, in the era and lifestyle of no-compromises, people with those related back problems will choose to replace their cars with ones that are easier to access!
          Trying to strap in kids into a normal car are harder than you think, especially for taller people. I am speaking out of experience with 3 kids~!
          I can see your point of view as well but in these self absorbed times do you think 4wd and suv buyers care about the visibility problems they cause to others?

  • Tony

    while i’d agree with you andy, manufacturers make what the customer wants

    if people want 2wd SUVs… they will make them

    also these sorts of SUVs appeal to older folk who have bad backs who don’t want to ‘climb down’ into a normal sedan

    hey… it’s a lot better than a $29,990 Holden Captiva or a $50k Kluger which is still FWD!

    • http://www.betweentwopoints.com Andy

      Yeah, I understand, Tony. Mazda is simply going to what customers want. I don’t begrudge them making something that will sell.

      Just annoys me, is all. :) I’m sure we’re all allowed one irrational pet-hate.

  • Whitbomb07

    Perfect for the soccer mums who think they need a SUV to keep themselves and their kids ‘safe’.



  • biggie

    wow… pretty nice exterior and interior, even for a “downgraded” CX7.

    fuel consumption for classic is impressive. the outlander I’m driving now is doing 13L in city. this is the one with the new front design. outlander steering is impeccable, compared to the understeer in cx7. but i wish it could be lower in fuel consumption.

    i would definitely consider classic given the std reverse camera, and nice interior.

  • Jonty

    I with you Andy, has to be my pet hate also…all too often I return to my car and have to reverse out with zero visibility. There seem to be more of these (than sedans) on the roads these days.

  • Duckula

    A bit off topic… but really well written review( regardless of the car reviewed) short and concise, some of the reviews recently ( not all by the same reviewer) tend to waffle on and on and on…. nice one Karl.

  • Steven

    If we had no inclination of going off-road then this would have been high on the list but the Forester won the day.

    The only negative things were the high rear windows which could lead to car sickness for the little people!

  • scottwheels

    I have the CX-7 (MY07 Luxury) and I hired an Outlander for a work trip (750km return). I was impressed with the Outlander’s ergonomics, but the engine and tyre noise was mush more intrusive IMO. My other car is a ’98 diesel Terrano II, so I know all about noise! I (and my wife) chose the Mazda over the competition for the right combination of price, spec, safety, performance and that extra luxury (we still argue over who has to drive the Terrano II). The kids never complain about the high hip window height – to be honest they’re too busy with their electronic games and DVDs. Scenery… what scenery!

  • Richard C

    OMG!!! 0-100 in 11.1 seconds? A Hyundai Getz is probably quicker. My CR-V with it’s smaller 2.4L engine does the same sprint in 8.5 seconds.

    • MazMagic

      Heavy Car + Small Engine = slow.

      Even a mid-1990’s Mazda 626 4 Cylinder could beat this without any problems.

      If I was getting a CX-7, I would get the Turbo or Diesel. If not, get a 6 instead.

    • quiet1

      The compact SUV sector is primarily for families where the 0-100 time is really not that relevant !!..

      I doubt whether anyone will buy an SUV which does 0-100 in 5 secs and drive with his wife and children sitting alongside…

      let’s leave those figures for the RX8’s and the GTI’s…

  • ohreally

    Although this is one of the better looking SUVs, I think the mazda 6 is much better value and a better looker too.

    how long until the suv fashion dies out?

    did the suv drivers feel adventurous yesterday driving through ten cms of water in melbourne?

    • Richard C

      I don’t know, but the higher ground clearance of SUVs would certainly come in handy if you were caught in flooded streets.

    • scottwheels

      When we bought the CX-7 three years ago, there was no Diesel Mazda 6, and to spec one up equivalent to the CX-7 resulted in a price differential of about 5%. The CX-7 load space was bigger, it had the more powerful turbo engine from the MPS and IMO looked better than the 6 wagon (this was the previous model, not the current 6). We’ve also taken it down some rocky tracks in Kakadu where you’d never take a standard ground clearance vehicle.

  • Cupid Stunt

    Classically boring hard plastic interior from Mazda, come on up the anti, the rest of it is good.
    Apparently Mazda have stopped selling the petrol CX7 in the UK as only 170 sold in two years. In the first two month of the diesel selling it sold 100 units. Says it all here.

  • Kenn

    2WD auto CX 7 is around $37k a 4WD auto Outlander LS is 36k. A 4WD vehicle is lot more valve for money than a 2WD one.

  • Anf

    There should be a rule making sure that soccer mums dont purchase SUV’s in Australian, half of them can not see over the dash & if they can they are wearing sunglasses bigger than their heads, they can barely drive a hatchback, they can not park the things, they probably didnt pay for it…its a danger hazard

  • CR

    Just purchased one to replace a VZ commodore ute (the ute just lacked practicality)!!
    Really liked the reveiw… informative and even the reader comments helped in my decision. My summary… really comfortable, better appointed than ALL comparable vehicles, speed is not an issue, I actually find it hard to keep within speed limits, car goes well and very quiet…I am wrapt with my decision to purchase.Economy much better than the V6 (no surprise) but still perfroms well within my expectations. Love it.

  • dave

    Cx7,ix35, Captiva 5, Sportage… I feel a mega test comming on.

    • LessQQ

      why would any review compare the CX-7 to Korean sub-class?

  • http://www.carpeople.com.au Car People

    I like the CX-7 but I prefer the CX-9 because I need extra space.

    If I needed to downsize I would definitely look at the CX-7 diesel.

    I don’t think its necessarily a matter of ‘fashion’ with SUVs (earlier comment). They do fulfil some genuine needs in the market place and as long as those needs exist and SUVs meet them affrodably, they’ll continue to sell well.

  • Harrjac

    Has anyone else had problems with the turbo? I have a 2006 model and has 68000km on the clock. It has been service at least every 7000-8000km and turbo is now shot. One of the nuts came off the compressor wheel and the shaft has snapped.

    The local dealer has since told me that the oil feed line has become blocked due to lack of servicing. After showing my service records he backed off this but is saying that because it is out of warranty there is nothing they can do and require a new engine and turbo for approx $15000. This is almost half what I paid for it.

    After speaking to a few turbo shops it seems to be a common problem with the CX7. They tell me it is a design fault. Apparently the oil feed line is too close to the manifold and the position of the turbo (near firewall and lack of ventilation) has the oil in the feed line being baked by the mainfold and thereby clogging it up. Apparently this is the same issue that they have with the BA Falcon XR6 and Charades.

    If anyone could give me feedback on their experiences it would be much appreciated.

    • JJ

      I am going through the same problem. The oil line is too small and the line is clogging. I just blew my second turbo and I am really upset. Have you found a solution to replacing the line? The dealler has a big issue with this line and I have not found a solution. Thanks for the update.

  • Gunz

    I have CX7 2008. It’s a great car actually. 2,4 L with 240HP turbo engine is big. 4×4 AWD is also helpfull when we run on slippery road. 6 speeds transmission is very smooth. 6 disc Bose sound system with 9 speakers is very good audio. The problem that I have is the suspension is really stiff for me. However in return it has very good handling to manuver in the road.
    So far I don’t have significant problem. If we talk about the design (exterior and interior) then it just about our own taste.

  • CSS

    Hi Karl. how does the cx7 compare to a renault koleos?? all the reviews i’ve read are pretty good for the koleos but do you know how they stacking up in the parts and servicing department?? and do you have any idea/thoughts on why they just arent selling??

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Karl Peskett

      CSS, thanks for the question.

      As a brand, Renault isn’t as well known as Mazda. For a long time, Renaults have been priced quite highly and suffered as a result. Mazda has some excellently priced, highly competitive and quality product across the board, which is why on brand strength alone, people will be heading into Mazda showrooms. The Zoom-Zoom campaign was also very well advertised.

      As far as the Koleos goes, it’s a quirky alternative, which there’s no doubt isn’t as good looking as the CX-7. It’s also an X-Trail underneath, which is quite widely known – people probably wouldn’t pay the extra for a more expensive X-Trail, and personally, I think the X-Trail is more practical and better looking.

      Parts and servicing is something you’d have to contact the respective dealers to find out.

      I hope this helps.

  • manu

    well … i just bought this car. I have test driven ALL of the other cars in the class except the hyundai which i simply wouldnt be seen driving. Each car seems to have different aspects that they excel in. Some are very practical, others have really nice features for the price etc. I realy liked the nissan dualis – even though it is only a little softroader, the x-trail is also a good looking car, but it has a horrible crash rating. I tried the VW Tiguan, basically it is the same as my friends Golf, only its a bit taller – it is small, the dualis feels bigger. Rav4 has a pretty crap interior and needs an update badly – it did feel like a much bigger car, and didnt really drive that nicely. REally the only car that was even close to the CX& was subaru forester – its good looking on the outside and drives ok, but the inside looks cheap, seriously cheap – it feels like u are driving around in a giant plastic box – and it was noisy. i did like the reclining rear seat and really i would have thoguth the CX7 had one too, but it doesnt. I was very happy to hand over my money for the CX7 – it is a bigger car (if not taller), drives very well, the car doesnt feel like it is going to tip over when u go around a corner, it looks great outside, the interior is amazing for the price – it is really the nicest i have seen in a long time, the standard features are pretty good – 6stack cd, climate control, reverse camera etc, it has a 5 speed auto – as opposed to 4 speed in the subaru (which really revs the hell out of the engine on the freeway). I have not a single regret in buying the CX7 – i am a very happy customer.

    … a few things to note:
    CRV is made in thailand and according to the stats takes 13 seconds to 100ks (the guy who says it gets there in 8.5 seconds needs a new watch!) and the fuel consumption in thhis article is for city driving only – 11 litres in the city is pretty damn good!

    • Confused

      Manu, Can I ask what made you decide the CX-7 over the Nissian Dualis. These are the two cars I am currently deciding over! Thanks.



    “I bought a 2007 CX-7 that had travelled 32K. I thought this was a good buy until the issues started. These issues started 2 weeks after the new car warranty finished.

    Firstly the A/C compressor seized – car off the road for a week, new compressor $600. 1 week later the vehicle’s Turbo blew – car off the road for 3 days plus a $4K bill. Third issue involves an oil leak that will cost $900 to replace a particular part.

    In asking Mazda Australia for assistance we have been informed by Emanuel (Customer Service & Technical Case Study Manager) that due to the issues being outside the warranty period they will not cover or assist in any of the problems. No goodwill or assistance offered by Mazda. I have since found out that all 3 issues are common and known faults with the CX-7. This makes the Mazda Australia response even harder to comprehend. This is the last Mazda I will own and I recommend that you do not buy a Mazda of any series/badge. ”

    • George

      Thanks Light,

      I really appreciated. Actually I am going to sign the contract for CX7 classic this morning. Luckily I read your advice then I’m going to call off the dealer. I’m driving Hyundai Tucson city 2009 at the moment. I’m going to upgrade my old Tucson, due to under power (2.0ltr engine), rough suspension, noise and fuel consumption is 100km for 13-ltr in city (the best is 12.5ltr) and (wind + tyre) noise on the freeway. Now I don’t to what to buy. Please suggest me for my new one as I don’t want to make mistake as my old Tucson?

      P.s – I don’t like diesel engine.


      • m2m

        We currently have 4 Mazda’s in our family, all of them absolutely faultless and do their job perfectly. I mean 100% top quality, enjoyable to drive and couldn’t ask for much more. Please don’t dismiss the brand because of a bad ownership experience of a pre-owned and out of warranty CX-7 (that may have been thrashed by last owner for all we know) Talk to the thousands of people who are buying Mazda’s each month and i’m sure they won’t have much to complain about.

        The N/A petrol model and diesel would be the pick though, just for the fact that the turbo drinks like a fish and would obviously cost more to run (it’s a turbo).

  • whichcartobuy

    Ah, LIGHT, you just stopped me from opening my purse for the good looking CX-7! I can only sypathize on you and I am surprised that CX-7 was made to last only for the warranty period. Shame on Mazda who don’t see the big picture.

    Now next on my list is Forester.

  • http://Myacou@optusnet.com.au Michelle

    Just bought a Mazda cx7 paid 33k for it, did I get a good deal? Can’t stand these car salesmen.

    • Light On

      Well, Good luck. Don’t keep your one until warranty end.
      Light On

  • Mr Forrester

    My Forrester Diesel gets 6.8L per 100kms round town. Less on highways. Great in every other department too. Have had it for 3 months and I can definitely recommend it if your looking for a budget, mid sized SUV.

  • Ren

    We have a Mazda CX-7 2007 model, great car to drive but at 40,000 the turbo went and we have had 2 oil leaks since! Mazda have been painful to deal with and l will never buy a Mazda again!

  • trobbo

    Warning !!!!

    Turbo issues….2007 CX7

    The turbo has gone on our CX7,only done 60,000km’s. We have only had the car just under 3 years..full service history & well maintained vehicle. We assumed & were told by the salesman that we had ‘3year new car warranty’. But as it was a ‘mazda demo’ model we are out of new car warranty (by 3mths)….thanks Mazda !!! Two claims were made to Mazda Australia…DENIED !! DENIED !!!

    We are now in the process of having the turbo reconditioned & the vehicle fixed at our own expense !!! So much for having a new car. We got told the same story about using ‘high quality’ oil & that servicing is a priority for the CX7….mmm but no mention of this when we bought the vehicle..

    After doing some research it seems to be a very common problem with the CX7, despite being told by the dealership ‘we have NEVER heard of a turbo going on a CX7 with 60,000k’s on the clock !!!’

    Mazda knows of this problem but are not willing to help out or admit there is a problem…

    Off to trade in the CX7 !!!!!

  • victor

    I’m looking for a compact SUV and have recently tested diven a few. I agreed with Manu’s comment. For those who says or worries the classic’s 2.5 is undpowered, please test drive first. Should I mention its max touqe is reached at 2000rpm, and the 5sp auto matches so well with the engine which is so willing to rev. The result is, from standing, it never feels slower compared with any similarly priced SUV execpt the turbo VW, but considerig the futrue cost of its turbo engine and DSG, the choice is really yours. Inside dash is a bit dark n plain, but so much better than Forester n Rav4, but bettered than CRV IMO (but CRV seriously lacks low end tourqu, and the 8.5s 0-100…), at this price, it’s well done.

  • Vince Seetho

    The sound upon accelerating is dreadful. It really sounds like a toy car despite having 2.5L engine!
    Other than this, I find it very very good and rather stable for a SUV. It is quieter than the Honda CRV for sure which I consider to be one of the most reliable SUV ever. The only thing is it isn’t as pretty as the CX 7. No regrets so far!

  • jason

    I bought a 2007 CX-7 just over a yr ago with 37k and at the time paid to much (new model was just coming out and should have known better) 1st issue: turbo blowing smoke and within 12 months air cond seized up – total bill would have been approx $6k but even though I was just out of warranty with turbo and approx 10months out of warranty with air cond Mazda raplaced both with new parts, these are both common issues with 06 and 07 CX7s, go through a good mazda dealer and they approach mazda for the repair, if you want to also lodge a complaint to mazda then surely it cant hurt but both mine were through a dealer, after all this is a fully imported japanese car that is meant to be up there with the best!
    In summary – you wont find a more comfortable car in this range ie: compared to forester, dualis, kia etc.

    • grant fyvie

      I just had the A/C blow up in my 2007 cx 7 not long out of warrinty what are my chances of warrinty as this seems to be a common problem

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au Chris

    I have a CX-7 Classic. It’s slow, average handling and I average about 9.5 litres per 100 (60-40 highway-city). I love this car. It has adequate space for my 5 person family. It’s quiet and comfortable. It looks cool and retains its resale like no other in the Australian market. Get into it, you won’t regret the purchase.

  • Zara

    Hi, i just bought a Cx-7 classic, great deal with all the extras, poor guys at the shop didnt make any money off me(lucky i know people)

    I think they are fantastic cars with great space and sexy style. i must admit i do prefer bigger cars as i am looking at getting two dogs, i moved up from a honda accord euro and i really must say the cx7 really does do its self justice she handles great, petrol amazing and comfort to have those road trips to Sydney in.

    very happy owner

    • Zara

      To the comments above pointing the finger at soccer mums and there SUV’s. There allowed to, there is no shame in having a big car for their kids and the safty in these cars are great next to the small mazda twos or even threes, i was quiet annoyed at people judging mums and SUV’s as you dont see us pointing the finger and man and there turbo’d toys… come on people everyone has there own opinion on their cars… You wouldnt catch me dead in a small car because thats just my opinion. so please respect the reasons for mums and their choose in cars…. sorry if i have offended anyone…

    • Richard

      Hi Zara, i’m planing to buy CX-7 Classic FWD in Jan next year. Can you tell me about the deal you got. WHich dealer was it with? Will much appreciate your input.

  • Ricardo

    I have recently purchased the 2011 CX-7 Classic FWD and absolutely love it. It is perfect for my city driving, it looks sensational and they are walking out the door of my local dealership due to all the extra features incl 6-stack CD, air-con, cruise control, reverse camera as standard and a very attractive price-tag (to prepare for the new CX-5 coming next year). The Classic is on special now (Oct 2011) for around $33,000 maximum (I did a much better deal!).

    Admittedly, my trade-in was 16 years old, so I really have noticed a big difference, but I love everything about this car. It gives me a nice sense of importance and provides a really enjoyable driving experience. Thanks Mazda.

    • Richard

      Hi Ricardo, i’m planing to buy CX-7 Classic FWD in Jan next year. Can you tell me about the deal you got. WHich dealer was it with? Will much appreciate your input.

  • grant fyvie

    This A/c problem should be repaired under warrinity a car of this calibre should go a lot longer than just out of the warrinty period

Mazda CX-7 Specs

Car Details
Body Type
New Price
Private Sale
$14,520 - $16,500
Dealer Retail
$16,100 - $19,140
Dealer Trade
$11,600 - $13,200
Engine Specifications
Engine Type
Engine Size
Max. Torque
205Nm @  2000rpm
Max. Power
120kW @  6000rpm
Pwr:Wgt Ratio
Bore & Stroke
Compression Ratio
Valve Gear
Drivetrain Specifications
Drive Type
Final Drive Ratio
Fuel Specifications
Fuel Type
Fuel Tank Capacity
Fuel Consumption (Combined)
9.4L / 100km
Weight & Measurement
Kerb Weight
Gross Vehicle Weight
Not Provided
Ground Clearance
Towing Capacity
Brake:1000  Unbrake:750
Steering & Suspension
Steering Type
Turning Circle
Front Rim Size
Rear Rim Size
Front Tyres
215/70 R17
Rear Tyres
215/70 R17
Wheel Base
Front Track
Rear Track
Front Brakes
Rear Brakes
Front Suspension
MacPherson strut, Coil Spring, Gas damper, Anti roll bar
Rear Suspension
Multi-link system, Coil Spring, Gas damper, Anti roll bar
Standard Features
Automatic Air Con / Climate Control
Control & Handling
17 Inch Alloy Wheels, Electronic Brake Force Distribution, Traction Control System
Cruise Control, Power Steering, Reversing Camera, Trip Computer
CD with 6 CD Stacker, Radio CD with 4 Speakers
Metallic Paint, Power Mirrors, Rear Spoiler
Cloth Trim, Power Windows
Dual Airbag Package, Anti-lock Braking, Head Airbags, Seatbelts - Pre-tensioners Front Seats, Side Front Air Bags
Central Locking Remote Control, Engine Immobiliser
Service Interval
6 months /  10,000 kms
36 months /  999,000 kms
VIN Plate Location
Pass Side Front Floor
Country of Origin